Is it worthwhile to put an inline fuse on the test lead of a cheap DMM (UT120C)?

[Fungus]

I've ordered the Fluke 106, it has everything that's needed around the house

Good choice. The only thing it really lacks is milli and micro ranges. That's not good for electronics engineers but it's a fine little meter for everything else.

it seems a bit artificially dumbed down.

Talk to the marketing department about that. I guess they didn't want to take sales away from the expensive meters.

Thanks. It's really opened my eyes on just how hit and miss these products can be.   

You mean that products from one manufacturer can behave very differently?

Massively. Uni-T in particular is very hit and miss between models. Some are OK, some are really bad.

It's not about price, either. Dave bought a $180 Uni-T meter (with his own money) that turned out to be garbage on the inside.

[3141592]

it seems a bit artificially dumbed down.

Talk to the marketing department about that. I guess they didn't want to take sales away from the expensive meters.

It's a bit of a shame that they can get away with this, just because they do the safety part properly and there is too few or no competing meter that is safe and provides the basics right. It seems more like that the manufacturers of the cheap DMMs could do this for half the price, they just haven't thought of safety (instead of features) as a selling point. The UT71E in the video seems to be a good example of this.

[Fungus]

it seems a bit artificially dumbed down.

Talk to the marketing department about that. I guess they didn't want to take sales away from the expensive meters.

It's a bit of a shame that they can get away with this

You can get a Fluke 15B for about the same price as a 106. It has those features but it's not as small/cuddly.

[joeqsmith]

Thanks. It's really opened my eyes on just how hit and miss these products can be.   

You mean that products from one manufacturer can behave very differently?

Massively. Uni-T in particular is very hit and miss between models. Some are OK, some are really bad.

It's not about price, either. Dave bought a $180 Uni-T meter (with his own money) that turned out to be garbage on the inside.

Before I started this testing, I expected the majority of products would survive some basic low energy transients.  I had no basis for this.   Blind trust.

I agree.  It's not about the price.  The Fluke 87V was over $400 when I checked and their 101 was under $50.   I suspect if I tested an  87V on my new generator, it would not just damage a few diodes.   Yet, the 107 at 1/4 the price has no problem with it.     In the case of UNI-T, it may be hit and miss, but all I have seen is miss.  If there is a UNI-T that's robust, that if I bought it in the US that it would be made with the same parts and no missing parts, I would like to know what it is.       

With all of Fluke's propaganda on testing, before this testing I would not have expected their most popular meter to fail at a level far below a product sold by Radio Shack.   That said, I would have never though that the Radio Shack meter would hold up as well as it did.   For the Brymen BM869s, I think I had more confidence in it than Brymen!    

[3141592]

Well, the Fluke 106 arrived and as a first impression, unless I've been duped, the supplied TL75 leads are truly horrible. Very stiff cabling, and there is oxidation on the tips, so without some force they don't provide a stable contact. Either Fluke is having a laugh selling these for 30 bucks in their store, or it's just a fake.

Anyone interested in some accuracy spot checks?

[retiredcaps]

unless I've been duped, the supplied TL75 leads are truly horrible.

Some clear focused pictures of both ends would help us determine if they are fake or not.  I'm guessing about 5 or 6 years ago, Fluke starting putting the make/model and date code on the actual cabling.  I believe it is white lettering.

Real TL75s can be stiff. They are not silicone.  Modemhead has some pictures of the real TL75s cut apart.

http://mrmodemhead.com/blog/no-name-vs-branded-test-leads/

As for the oxidation, some IPA might remove it.

[joeqsmith]

Well, the Fluke 106 arrived and as a first impression, unless I've been duped, the supplied TL75 leads are truly horrible. Very stiff cabling, and there is oxidation on the tips, so without some force they don't provide a stable contact. Either Fluke is having a laugh selling these for 30 bucks in their store, or it's just a fake.

Anyone interested in some accuracy spot checks?

Other than the leads, what do you think of the meter?

[3141592]

unless I've been duped, the supplied TL75 leads are truly horrible.

Some clear focused pictures of both ends would help us determine if they are fake or not.  I'm guessing about 5 or 6 years ago, Fluke starting putting the make/model and date code on the actual cabling.  I believe it is white lettering.

Real TL75s can be stiff. They are not silicone.  Modemhead has some pictures of the real TL75s cut apart.

http://mrmodemhead.com/blog/no-name-vs-branded-test-leads/

As for the oxidation, some IPA might remove it.

I didn't expect silicone, it's just that I've seen more flexible PVC leads... but my main problem is that you can't trust leads that are susceptible to corrosion. I have more leads than I'll ever need, so this is not a problem, it's just a bit weird, considering that these are sold for twice the price of a quality Brymen silicone set.

I'm inclined to believe that these are genuine, maybe adjusted for the Chinese market (attached are the pictures, best I can manage now, sorry).

Other than the leads, what do you think of the meter?

So far it's very nice, just what I expected. Small but not too small, not very rugged, but not cheap either. Functionality covers any household need I can think of. Accuracy seems good:


Resistance (.1% parts) :
100k: 100.2k
20k : 20.02k
1k  : 1.001k

DCV (compared to a BM857a):

BM857a      Fluke 106
0,6003      0,598
6,007       5,992
25,009      24,92
50,002      49,83

DC current (compared to a BM857a):

BM857a      Fluke 106
0,1107      0,109
0,5000      0,498
1,0019      0,999

ACV (compared to a BM857a):

@ 100Hz Sine
BM857a      Fluke 106
0,0704       0,071
0,7091       0,708
7,007        6,99

@ 50Hz Sine
226,2       224,3


A weird quirk is that you can sometimes rotate the switch without turning on the device, but this is rare.
Continuity is quite slow, worse than a non-latched would be, and it's volume is too low. This kinda feels like an artificial limitation.

Overall I'm quite satisfied with it, and I'm really looking forward to gifting it  Thank you guys for the previous recommendation and help!

[retiredcaps]

I'm inclined to believe that these are genuine, maybe adjusted for the Chinese market (attached are the pictures, best I can manage now, sorry).

They look genuine to me as well.

[jwm_]

Yeah, the fluke cables from the chinese market are a bit stiffer than the ones sold here and I think have a different CAT rating. I don't doubt they meet stated performance though.

[PedroDaGr8]

unless I've been duped, the supplied TL75 leads are truly horrible.

Some clear focused pictures of both ends would help us determine if they are fake or not.  I'm guessing about 5 or 6 years ago, Fluke starting putting the make/model and date code on the actual cabling.  I believe it is white lettering.

Real TL75s can be stiff. They are not silicone.  Modemhead has some pictures of the real TL75s cut apart.

http://mrmodemhead.com/blog/no-name-vs-branded-test-leads/

As for the oxidation, some IPA might remove it.

I didn't expect silicone, it's just that I've seen more flexible PVC leads... but my main problem is that you can't trust leads that are susceptible to corrosion. I have more leads than I'll ever need, so this is not a problem, it's just a bit weird, considering that these are sold for twice the price of a quality Brymen silicone set.

I'm inclined to believe that these are genuine, maybe adjusted for the Chinese market (attached are the pictures, best I can manage now, sorry).

Other than the leads, what do you think of the meter?

So far it's very nice, just what I expected. Small but not too small, not very rugged, but not cheap either. Functionality covers any household need I can think of. Accuracy seems good:


Resistance (.1% parts) :
100k: 100.2k
20k : 20.02k
1k  : 1.001k

DCV (compared to a BM857a):

BM857a      Fluke 106
0,6003      0,598
6,007       5,992
25,009      24,92
50,002      49,83

DC current (compared to a BM857a):

BM857a      Fluke 106
0,1107      0,109
0,5000      0,498
1,0019      0,999

ACV (compared to a BM857a):

@ 100Hz Sine
BM857a      Fluke 106
0,0704       0,071
0,7091       0,708
7,007        6,99

@ 50Hz Sine
226,2       224,3


A weird quirk is that you can sometimes rotate the switch without turning on the device, but this is rare.
Continuity is quite slow, worse than a non-latched would be, and it's volume is too low. This kinda feels like an artificial limitation.

Overall I'm quite satisfied with it, and I'm really looking forward to gifting it  Thank you guys for the previous recommendation and help!

It likely isn't corrosion but is instead mold release compound. This is VERY common on chinese made leads. In particular is a well known problem of Uni-T. There are some rumors that Uni-T is the china manufacturer for Fluke. Usually, a clean with some strong rubbing alcohol (aka Isopropanol or isopropyl alcohol) takes care of the issue. I strongly doubt that Fluke would allow corroded leads to be shipped period.

[3141592]

It likely isn't corrosion but is instead mold release compound. This is VERY common on chinese made leads. In particular is a well known problem of Uni-T. There are some rumors that Uni-T is the china manufacturer for Fluke. Usually, a clean with some strong rubbing alcohol (aka Isopropanol or isopropyl alcohol) takes care of the issue. I strongly doubt that Fluke would allow corroded leads to be shipped period.

Huh, I wouldn't have thought of that! A bit of cleaning seems to have solved the problem then. Thanks! Still a bit disappointing though...